Monday, October 21, 2024

Rip-off Report: Donald Trump is alleged to have combined his D.C. hotel with exorbitant room rates for certain guests to form a "personal government ATM"

Trump International Hotel, Washington, D.C. (MSNBC)

A Congressional report issued last week alleges Donald Trump used the U.S. Secret Service as his "personal government ATM" by overcharging the agency to stay at his hotels.

Axios provides one of the most detailed and damning accounts of what could become an explosive story as the 2024 election draws near. Under the headline "House Dem report: Trump used Secret Service as 'personal ATM'," Axios' Andrew Solender writes:

A report from Democrats on the House Oversight Committee released Friday accuses former President Trump of using the Secret Service as his "personal government ATM" by overcharging the agency at his hotels.

Why it matters: Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) has made Trump's finances a particular focus since becoming Oversight's ranking member, and has said he will likely pursue the topic further if Democrats retake the House.

  • He previously released a report in January accusing Trump of receiving at least $7.8 million from foreign countries, including China, at several of his properties while he was president.
  • The reports are based on documents obtained from Trump's accounting firm, Mazars, following years of high-profile court battles.

 How sketchy were the D.C. hotel's charging practices, especially when it involved corporate and government guests -- both domestic and foreign? Solender has details that should raise more than a few eyebrows. The report particularly raises questions about the Emoluments Clause of the U.S. Constitution:

Driving the news: The 58-page report, first reported by NBC News, outlines findings from guest logs for Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C.,  between September 2017 and August 2018.

  • "While this is an exceedingly small window into the opaque web of more than 500 corporations, limited liability companies, and trusts ... it is enough to reveal hundreds of unconstitutional and ethically suspect payments he accepted while in office from domestic sources," the report says.
  • The report cites documents showing the hotel charged Donald Trump Jr.'s Secret Service detail a room rate of $1,185 during a stay in November, 2017, well over the approved $201 government per diem rate.
  • It also alleges that in other instances, the Secret Service was charged nearly twice as much to stay in the hotel as other guests, including those representing foreign governments and companies.

What he's saying: Raskin said in a statement that lawmakers "must put legal barriers in place now to prevent the kind of rip-off corruption our Founding Fathers so strongly opposed."

"Given the need to enforce the U.S. Constitution against both foreign and domestic emoluments corruption, in the coming days, I will work with my Democratic Colleagues on a legislative fix and hope that my Republican colleagues will join us in this effort," he added.

    The other side: "Ranking Member Raskin and Democrats continue to expose their hypocrisy as they suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome," a spokesperson for the Republican majority on the Oversight Committee told Axios.

    • "Unlike the Bidens, the Trumps actually have businesses and made money from the services they provided. Today's report is more recycled garbage from the Democrats' fruitless and close to a decade-long investigation of President Trump.

Question: Do Republicans take anything seriously these days? Their retort to Axios about "Trump Derangement Syndrome" could make a reasonable observer wonder if the GOP even supports honest government. They mainly seem interested in being smart asses, a role they have played so well in the Trump years. For example, what does this issue have to do with the Bidens? I see nothing in the Axios story that involves them. But our domestic politics have devolved to a point that Republicans apparently think only a wise-guy response is necessary on a report that involves important constitutional issues.

No comments: